National Security Group Urges Congress to Examine Environmental Law Institute’s China Ties

The advocacy group says ELI’s past work with Chinese government-linked institutions deserves scrutiny alongside an existing House Judiciary inquiry.

The U.S. Capitol building in Washington on March 17, 2026. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times

A national security group is urging Congress to examine the Environmental Law Institute’s (ELI) past work with Chinese government-linked institutions, arguing that the nonprofit’s China programming should be reviewed alongside an existing House Judiciary inquiry into its climate-judicial education project.

National Security advocacy group State Armor sent a June 30 letter to five congressional committee chairmen asking them to investigate ELI’s partnerships, funding streams, and international relationships. The letter was addressed to House Energy and Commerce Chairman Brett Guthrie, House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party Chairman John Moolenaar, Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Mike Lee, and House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan.

The group’s report alleges that ELI has helped advance legal and policy frameworks that constrain U.S. energy producers while providing environmental governance expertise to Chinese institutions that operate under the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) one-party system.

“ELI has worked with universities and partners in China that U.S. authorities have directly linked to Chinese military research, intelligence activities, and influence operations,” states the report.

“ELI’s leadership has actively argued against treating China as a national security threat, despite U.S. government warnings to the contrary. ... It is concerning to see ELI stake out this position in strategic opposition to the American government which grants its tax-exempt status and has awarded it millions in taxpayer dollars.”

State Armor says Congress should determine whether ELI’s China-related work constituted routine international cooperation or a foreign-influence concern.

The group’s report points to ELI’s Climate Judiciary Project, or CJP, which ELI says has reached more than 2,000 judges, and to ELI’s long-running China Program, which ELI says has worked with Chinese NGOs, universities, law firms, businesses, judges, prosecutors, and environmental regulators.

House Judiciary Inquiry

State Armor’s request comes as the House Judiciary Committee is already pressing ELI over CJP.

In an April 28 letter to ELI President Jordan Diamond, Jordan and Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on courts, said ELI’s compliance with the committee’s inquiry had been “inadequate.” The committee said it could resort to “compulsory process” if ELI did not comply by May 5.

The committee said ELI had produced 1,432 pages of documents in more than seven months, including 251 pages from a single court filing. It said ELI had identified 121 federal judges who attended only seven of 24 acknowledged training events involving ELI and CJP.

The committee also said ELI had provided no information for 2022, 2023, 2025, or 2026, and had not confirmed whether its event lists for 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2024 were complete.

House Judiciary said several categories of requested information remained deficient or outstanding, including records of expenses paid to judges, transcripts and video recordings of training sessions, slide decks, communications related to curricula and presentations, and records for events beyond Federal Judicial Center and National Judicial College programs between 2019 and 2021.

The Epoch Times asked House Judiciary whether ELI met the May 5 deadline, whether the committee issued or prepared compulsory process, and whether State Armor’s June 30 letter had expanded the inquiry to include ELI’s China-related activities. No response was received by publication time.

Select Committee Chair’s Warning

Moolenaar, chairman of the House Select Committee on the CCP, told The Epoch Times that judges should avoid programs sponsored by groups linked to the CCP’s United Front system.

“The CCP is actively taking advantage of our open society and attempting to advance its malign influence across all levels of government,” Moolenaar said.

“The ethical duty to avoid even the appearance of impropriety is a foundational pillar of the American judiciary,” he said. “U.S. judges should closely vet the programs they participate in and never take part in training sponsored by CCP-linked United Front groups.”

Moolenaar did not say in the statement whether the committee has opened a formal inquiry into ELI’s China-related work.

Report Details

State Armor’s report argues that ELI’s judicial education and China work create what it calls an “asymmetric” policy problem: U.S. judges and regulators are exposed to legal theories that could pressure American energy producers, while Chinese state-linked institutions receive Western legal and regulatory expertise without facing comparable legal exposure.

The report cites CJP materials on climate attribution science and legal causation, including a 2022 presentation on “Legal Causation and Attribution Science” and materials that, according to State Armor, discuss source attribution for fossil-fuel companies and climate-related harm.

State Armor also alleges that CJP programming has included jurisdictions where climate lawsuits against energy companies have been filed.

Separately, the report focuses on ELI’s China Program.

ELI’s own China Program page says CIBDEG—the China International Business Dialogue on Environmental Governance—was designed to provide “information and analysis to the Chinese government regarding environmental regulations in the United States and Europe” and to provide businesses with information about Chinese environmental regulation and enforcement priorities.

ELI also says it worked with the Policy Research Center for Environment and Economy, or PRCEE, on comparative studies of global practices in compliance, enforcement, and air and water pollutant permitting. ELI describes PRCEE as a Chinese environmental think tank, while State Armor describes it as an institution affiliated with China’s Ministry of Ecology and Environment that supports the Chinese regime’s environmental policymaking.

ELI’s website says the institute worked with the China Environmental Protection Foundation to organize nine workshops since January 2018 at Tianjin University and Renmin University law schools in Beijing. The workshops were aimed at NGOs approved by Chinese civil authorities to engage in civil environmental litigation in China, according to ELI.

State Armor notes that some Chinese university partners later drew U.S. national-security scrutiny. The House Select Committee on the CCP said in 2024 that Tianjin University had been placed on the Commerce Department’s Entity List in 2020 and was involved in a trade-secret theft scheme involving technology with military applications.

ELI’s China Program page also says the institute hosted five Chinese environmental judges recommended by China’s Supreme People’s Court in 2017 and that then-ELI Vice President John Pendergrass presented on climate litigation at a 2016 workshop for the Supreme People’s Court and at a workshop for more than 200 judges on China’s environmental benches.

The page says China’s Supreme People’s Procuratorate invited then-ELI President Scott Fulton in December 2017 to train Chinese prosecutors in Xiamen on prosecutors’ role in environmental governance.

ELI Rejects Allegations

ELI rejected State Armor’s claims.

“For over 50 years, ELI has worked to strengthen environmental protections in dozens of countries,” Nick Collins, an ELI spokesman, told The Epoch Times by email. “Our programming in China concluded in 2024 but was no different than our typical work in the United States—sharing evidence-based best practices on environmental regulation, not advancing the interests of the Chinese government or the Chinese Communist Party.”

Collins said ELI “has never received any funding from the Chinese government or Chinese-based organizations,” and that CJP “has not conducted any programming in China.”

He said ELI has worked “diligently to cooperate” with the House Judiciary investigation and to provide information that “dispels any misunderstandings” about CJP.

“The goal of CJP is to provide judges with the tools they need to understand climate science and how it arises in the law,” Collins said. He said CJP “does not participate in litigation, coordinate with any parties related to any litigation, or advise judges on how to rule on any issue or in any case.”

The Epoch Times asked State Armor whether it has direct evidence linking Chinese entities to CJP operations or whether its concern is based on institutional overlap within ELI. It was also asked whether it is alleging legal violations. No response was received by publication time.

As of publication, no public committee letter reviewed by The Epoch Times shows that State Armor’s June 30 request has led to a new congressional inquiry into ELI’s China-related work.